|
|
|
|
|
|
by dspillett
1021 days ago
|
|
|
I remember it being the case that Doom was aggressively tight-loop optimized, so the small amount of L1 cache was more significant especially on clock-multiplied 486s. Though you are right that the SX/DX distinction wasn't meaningful for Doom as it was all done with internet mathematics. |
|
|
Which might actually be a fair comparison, The DX2 and SX were launched at the same time, so there is a decent chance the "fast 486 DX" someone is talking about is actually a DX2.
The SX2 was launched later, with the same 2x clock multiplier and same size L1 cache, so would preform identically to the DX2 (in non-fpu tasks like doom). But the DX4 was launched at the same time, now with a 3x multiplier and L1 cache doubled to 16KB....